Key Date Problem Coins

I think everyone is going to answer "depends". I could even see myself getting a holed one or a serious problem coin, holed or bent even, under some circumstances. Heck, I was thinking of making a 19th century all-holed type set. Now that I think about it, it seems like a lot of 3 cent pieces are holed; a set of all holed 3 cent silvers would be really fun to build.

I'd say close to 60% of my key dates have problems. It makes no difference to me. If a coin is reasonably priced and has issues then it will find a caring home in my collection.

Jumping on the Depends Bandwagon

I already have a few slabbed key date coins with issues. I have a "Genuine" 1877 IHC, a "Genuine" 1909-S IHC, a "Genuine" 1909-S VDB LWC, and a 1916-D Merc with fair details but rim damage.

As long as the eye appeal is there, I would not have a problem purchasing key dates but only at a discount.

Many of the coins that I collect, early coppers, have environmental issues. With the early dates you have no choice but to accept porosity, granularity or some verdigris if you want that coin.

KK

Really depends on the problem, the price, rareity, avaailability and on and on with all sorts of situations.
Some examples would be a 1885 Liberty Head Nickel in almost MS-66 except for a small scratch on the back, near the rim for say $100.
Or an 1894S Liberty Head Dime also in almost MS-66 grade with a dent on the edge for $1,000.
1856 Flying Eagle cent with a scratch on the reverse and accross the One Cent but for $500.
Just to many possible differences in the type of problem, the coin itself, the price, etc.
Such a poll would have to have many more subjects to make it even slightly decent.

This whole area was a problem for TPG from the start. In order to establish their original concept of "all ms65 coins are the same, and can be traded sight unseen, like stock certificates", they had to kick back any problem coins, typically called "body bags". Instead of doing what they should have done in the first place and determine whether such coins are genuine, they'd charge to tell you nothing of use.

This created a new problem. Instead of letting collectors determine grades and values, they set up a de facto sorting of coins, into "genuine, grade xyz, defect free" and "not collectable and worthless, because we don't like the looks, even though there is no question that it's genuine."

There are thousands of previously detectably cleaned or scratched svdbs that tens of thousands of collectors (as opposed to speculators) would be thrilled to own. Since when does someone else have the right to say "that's not collectable"?

Now that they realize they painted themselves into a corner (and the speculator market they hoped would send coin prices skyrocketing never developed), they went to "market grading" (this au58 coin is so nice, it should bring ms64 money, so we'll grade it ms64) and "net grading" (we think this toning, cleaning or scratches should lower the value by a grade, so the coin is au55, net xf40). Then when the market changes and such toning is held as a positive, you have an au55 in an xf40 holder that should sell for ms63 money.

All the more reason we don't need tpgs, period. Authenticators, absolutely, but grades are nothing more than something to argue about.